Subject: Re: Tar Multi Volume on /dev/fd0
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Francis Demierre <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/12/1994 14:40:09
> From owner-amiga@NetBSD.ORG Wed Oct 12 13:49:23 1994
> Return-Path: <owner-amiga@NetBSD.ORG>
> To: "NetBSD Amiga" <amiga@NetBSD.ORG>
> From: "Matthias Scheler" <email@example.com>
> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 23:56:25 +0100
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type > : > text/plain > ; > charset=us-ascii >
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Subject: Re: Tar Multi Volume on /dev/fd0
> Organization: Amiga User Group of the University Paderborn
> Content-Length: 357
> Status: RO
> Hi Francis,
> you wrote in <9410111246.AA11491@gamma.hasler.ascom.ch>:
> > I have definitely done multi-volume diskette tar under NetBSD and it
> > worked fine .... Just tell the size of one volume ...
> Why ?
> I don't need to do this with SunOS 4.1.x. If NetBSD is not able to handle
> this properly it's a big flaw.
> Matthias Scheler
I do not deny that is can be considered as a flaw,
i would just reword your sentence a little bit:
I don't need to do this with SunOS 4.1.x. If GNU tar is not able to handle
this properly it's a big flaw.
I had a quick look at the GNU tar source and if the size (-L <size>)
is not specified but -M is, it relies on getting either ENOSPC or EIO
or ENXIO error and will ask for a new volume if it got such an error
or it will otherwise choke out (writeerror() does an exit()).
/* We're multivol Panic if we didn't get the right kind of response */
/* ENXIO is for the UNIX PC */
if (err < 0 && errno != ENOSPC && errno != EIO && errno != ENXIO)
So, my guess would be that the floppy driver does not return the correct
Am I right ? Could the floppy driver author confirm this ?